Last post on Jan 28, 2013 at 5:55 PM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Audi A8, BMW 7 Series, Jaguar XJ-Series, Lexus LS 460, Mercedes-Benz S-Class, Volkswagen Phaeton, Maserati Quattroporte, Mercedes-Benz CL-Class, Sedan
Let's try to define this forum as being limited to luxury performance vehicles where the mainstream version in a typical configuration has an MSRP of at least $60k.
A luxury vehicle with a base price of $59k qualifies because it would typically be bought with some additional equipment, bringing the MSRP over $60k.
Vehicles like the E, 5, A6, M, or GS, even if available in certain versions over $60k, don't qualify because they are cars from companies that have higher end cars in their lineups.
#5687 of 24726 6-Series
Jul 08, 2004 (12:16 am)
I personally don't have a problem with the front:
but the rear:
is gawd-awful. Imo, this could have been a beautiful car if it were not for that stupid trunklid.
There is something elegant about a luxury car in White:
Though not necessarily in this case. Gulp(!) I still find the 6 to be an "interesting" car. The convertible more than the coupe.
I'm not sure if BMW intended for the 6-Series to compete with the Mercedes CL. There is a bit of a price/size difference there. BMW took the safe route and place the 6-Series between the CLK and CL in both price and size. Time will tell if this was smart. Mercedes kinda did the samething with the CLK, somewhat competeing with the 3-Series on the low end (like in size) and cars like the SC430 and XK8 on the high end (engines, features). Only the CLK offers a V6 and a V8, with everyone else it is either a 6 or an V8, but not both. I think this is why the CLK has been so successful in what has been a very tough market for coupes. Nobody else seems to be able to keep their coupes selling past those first two years and the previous CLK was an in-demand car for all 5 model years, especially the Cabriolet versions.
Luxury/sport GT Coupes don't always fit into the strictly defined categories like sedans usually do I've noticed. Actually the CL was facelifted pretty extensively for 2003, mainly interior upgrades, which were needed.
Jul 08, 2004 (3:43 am)
I dont like the front of the 6 either, it looks like somebody tied a cinder block under the front bumper and it dragged the front down giving it that sleepy, bored look. As for my thoughts on the STS, has anyone else noticed that Cadillac incentives have surpassed $6,000 per car? That spells one thing, people arent willing to pay the prices that Cadillac THINKS it can get for its cars. The STS might MSRP for $62K, but it will sell for $52K.
Jul 08, 2004 (5:45 am)
I'll check them out. How do you screw up a car that good looking and why mess with it so much anyway?? By the time its finished with its new model run it will be too late for Bruno to come out of retirement and rescue it. Its a great looking car that, at times I think the Audi tops. But that's because the A8 maintained more of the classic big lux look while the S combined a lot of sport with some classic. But looking at the refreshed S with the larger grill makes me realize what a great car Bruno came up with. The only thing I didn't like on the 2001 was the grill which I thought was a bit too 'mousy' for a car that large. The refresh cleaned that up beautifully and had the more classic MB grill. Unfortunately Audi will do the opposite and hurt the A8 with that absurd new grill they came up with.
By the way - you are hard on Lexus - I think you know that - but I've always found you pretty honest and frank on MB despite your favoritism there.
BMW sales up 17% in June - bad designs and all. But somehow I think a true model by model comparative to prior year would not bear that out. The X3 though should be combined with regular 3 series sales because I'm sure it has taken some 3 series sales away.
Jul 08, 2004 (6:48 am)
For some reason people are buying 745s. Despite its better looks, the 740 never sold well. At least not here.